Watch: Bear Wallow Suspect Bigfoot Stabilized & Slowed
Anomaly of interest captured on camera in Bear Wallow. The subject has characteristics of Bigfoot including feet and toes. Is this an illusion from head to toe. Or did RMSO capture a Bigfoot?
Questions of the day: Something's not right about Patty, why are the soles of her feet white?
Kittalia A. sent us the following questions about Patty, the Bigfoot in the Patterson-Gimlin film. They are all very good questions that we we wish we knew the answers to. We're no "Henry May" and it's times like this that we wish we had his number. Since we don't have Henry around whenever we need him, here are some easy questions for all you Patterson-Gimlin believers to try and answer:
Eat shit firsters
ReplyDeleteBigfoot is everywhere with these guys. smh. They lack objectivity.
ReplyDeleteThat's a 17 footer. No doubt at all. You can tell by the size of his bunyons. Which is fortunate since all they managed to film was the pinky toe of the left foot.
ReplyDeleteI'm seeing the "red/brown" in the pine trees, nothing else.
ReplyDeleteI see blue and black.
ReplyDeleteI see gold and white
DeleteThe whole dress color thing illustrates the variability of human perception. I'm in a meeting at work today with five others (yes I have a job) and someone brings up the dress photo on the projection screen. Four in the room were adamant that the dress was white and gold and two of us swore we were seeing blue and black. We were all looking at the same photo at the same time.
DeleteThis is why eyewitness accounts, photos, videos, and other evidence that is subject to our perception is poor quality evidence. Science attempts to gather and analyze data in such a way as to minimize error due to the potential fallibility of our perception.
Holmes - you've cracked the case! Here is just another example to demonstrate how subjective our perception can be. Where one sees a pile of sticks, another sees a bigfoot structure. Where one hears a coyote howl, another hears a bigfoot. Where one sees shadows, another sees bigfoot and so on. These people simply see and hear what they want - and they want bigfoot.
DeleteYou went a little off base there pal, audio has nothing to do with imaginary perception. I didn't expect much else from someone who doesn't realise Watson was a catalyst for Holmes' thought processes, in turn criticising them... One "sees what they want to"; indeed, or in your case, are limited to understand.
DeleteThe problem is that tens of thousands of reports do not fall into such an easy category. And sources of video evidence that shows motion outside of the capabilities of normal humans, are not applicable to any such claims.
^ yeah - both coke heads too which sums up your sherlock like deductive powers of what leads to an ability for good analysis - stay with the saturday morning cartoons
DeleteHey sweetheart... How about you show me my poor analysis?
DeletezzzzzzZZZZZZZZ!!! (cough, splutter)
Oh, sorry... I just woke up.
I'll save it for a specimen.
DeleteAudio can't be misperceived? What about backward masking?
DeleteAudio can't be misperceived? What about backward masking?
DeleteMillions seeing white and gold didn't make the dress white and gold.
DeleteThousands of reports is a phenomenon, not good evidence of bigfoot.
DeleteYou'll save it for a specimen? Are you sure it won't just be a deformed hairy tramp? Audio both above and below the frequency of human-primates can't be mispercieved. When anthropologists, primatologists, wildlife biologists and peioeering plastic surgeons way in on your irrelevant black and blue dress, you'll have a point. Tens of thousands of reports are when they're supported by physical evidence.
DeleteGood Lord man - are you daft? I'm taking about sound you can HEAR like bigfoot howls, yells and all that nonsense - not your silly infrasound you claim these beasties use. You banter on like you have the support of all these learned specialists when truth be known they are just a tiny minority. I implore you good sir to come to your senses. Tens of thousands of reports indeed! If they are anything like what shows up regularly here I shalt be bothered.
DeleteGOOD DAY TO YOU, SIR!
Kelley described the subject as gray, but focuses on completely stationary brown fuzzy stuff that are more likely stumps, with his video camera. He also failed to photograph the fuzzy stuff from either another angle or close up. This is not exactly logical nor scientifical.
ReplyDeleteSorry Kelly, those were pine cones.
ReplyDeleteLOL. Another load of bigfoot BS wishful thinking.
ReplyDeleteJesus Christ, is it really that hard to use past tense? Or did this guy just learn the English language?!?
ReplyDeleteHe CAME, not, he come ... He RAN, not, he RUN.
What a maroon.